Rosehill House

Updated 16 February 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 10 January 2018 and was unannounced. The inspection was carried out by one adult social care inspector an expert by experience and was unannounced. An expert-by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

During this inspection we spoke with 12 people living at the home and four visiting relatives. We looked at the care plans files and medicines records for the people living in the home and at four people’s care records in greater detail. We observed the care and support staff provided to people in the communal areas of the home and at meal times. We observed medicines being handled and discussed medicines handling with the staff involved.

We spoke with five care staff, a senior staff member, the deputy manager and the registered manager. We reviewed five recruitment files, two belonging to staff members who had been recruited since the last inspection. We checked documentation that was relevant to the management of the service including quality assurance and monitoring systems.

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We checked the information we held about statutory notifications sent to us about incidents and accidents affecting the service and people living there. We used a planning tool to collate all this evidence and information prior to visiting the home.

We contacted health and social services commissioners who contracted people’s care. We also contacted the local safeguarding and adult social services teams. We spoke with health care professionals who supported people who lived in the home.

Updated 16 February 2018

We carried out this unannounced inspection on 10 January 2018. Our last inspection of the home was carried out in August 2015. At that inspection we rated the service as good. At this inspection in January 2018 we found the service remained good.

Rosehill House is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The home provides personal care and accommodation for up to 23 older adults including people living with dementia. Accommodation is provided in five double and 13 single rooms, all with en-suites. Communal rooms are situated on the ground floor of the home. The home does not have a dining room. CCTV is used in some areas of the home. At the time of our inspection 18 people were living in the home.

There was a registered manager employed in the home. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

The environment was well-maintained and the atmosphere was relaxed and homely.

There were processes and practices in place to keep people safe. People told us they felt safe living in Rosehill House and with the staff who supported them. Hazards to people’s safety had been identified and managed.

People were supported by staff who knew them well and were focussed on promoting their independence and well-being. There was a stable staff team who had the skills and knowledge to meet people's needs. The service had a programme of training which ensured staff had up to date guidance and information.

The staff knew how to identify and report abuse and to identify any changes to a person’s condition that would require attention. Robust systems were used when new staff were employed to ensure they were suitable to work in the home.

People received the support they required to maintain good health and medicines were handled safely. A feature of the home was the partnership working with external healthcare professionals. Healthcare professionals described the home as “a delight to work with” and staff competence in managing health conditions had “taken a big step up in the last couple of years”. The home received high praise from NHS teams for people in the home staying pressure sore free for over two years and this was described by this team as a “fantastic achievement.”

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. They were involved in planning their own support and which activities they wanted to take part in. There was a full programme of activities for people to take part in and people were supported to follow individual interests and hobbies.

We made a recommendation about assessing people’s capacity to make decisions and to take this into consideration in the use of CCTV cameras.

Staff were caring and treated people with dignity and respect. People were provided with meals and drinks that they enjoyed. The staff were knowledgeable about the support people required to enjoy their meals and drinks safely and this was provided.

The registered manager and senior staff team carried out checks on the premises and quality of the service, including seeking people's views, to ensure people received a high quality, safe service that met their needs. The management structure in the home had been strengthened since the last inspection and this had led to improvements in the service, such as care planning and the thoroughness of audits.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.